Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » "A 2-state solution may not be a top priority for this administration". The hos encouraged Net to build more settlements.then flipped. Why?
RosieG

"A 2-state solution may not be a top priority for this administration". The hos encouraged Net to build more settlements.then flipped. Why?

After the hos encouraged more west bank settlement building he said soon after that doing so was not good for peace. So which is it? Can Net have his way and forge ahead or should he stop and not? The hos and Net meet today. Who gets his way? We know what Net wants. Carte Blanche.  What does the hos want? Will it stick or will he flip again? Why?

Posted - February 15, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • 13268
    Hi Rosie:

    Perhaps the final decision is up to Israel and the Palestinians, not the US.
      February 15, 2017 7:41 AM MST
    0

  • 35623
    Trump simply went back to America's position under Reagan. The settlements are legal but do not help the peace process.
      February 15, 2017 7:54 AM MST
    0

  • 739
    If President ****-For-Brains moves the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, we will never get peace in the middle east. Stu has a point about the USA, or UK, staying the hell out of it. Certainly, if we can't come up with effective policy solutions to make things better, we should avoid doing things just for the sake of being seen to try something, and making things worse.  Moving policy back to what it was under Reagan and the legality of settlements, 2Cents? Do you not suspect that having a wife who converted to Judaism, and a son-in-law come advisor who is an orthodox Jew may have coloured Donald's judgement a bit? Incidentally, that rift between Net and Obama was all Net's doing. He went out of his way to get on the wrong side of Obama and provoke him. This post was edited by my2cents at February 15, 2017 11:38 AM MST
      February 15, 2017 8:08 AM MST
    1